First, let me say I like the figure. A lot. Imaginative pose, good details, love the log palisade base.
But I have to say that we, as an art-form, should be WAY past the whole "it's a big 54mm" discussion by now. Just tell me what SCALE the sculptor used to make the musket. All other measurement conventions are meaningless (x mm to the crown, y mm to the eyes, z mm if he's sitting, measured to his left nostril - kind of like the old joke about why women can't be engineers/architects).
I will support any sculptor's desire to make a figure in whatever size/scale he or she wishes, and will show that support, or lack thereof, with my dollars.
Yes, I'm liking 75mm/1/24th/whatever more and more these days, but I also like 28mm size, so 54mm/60mm/1/30th/whatever is right in my comfort zone. Heck, I'll even expend or contract the comfort zone if I really like a figure.
And we all know the whole "different heights/shapes" argument. But the size of the rifle/sword/spear doesn't change, regardless of how tall the holder is.
Manufacturers, just tell me that one fact, and I'll deal with the rest of it.
Remember, I like the figure, a lot, and I'll probably own one in the near future.
Regardless of the frickin' "size" . . . [rant mode off] Thanks for listening.